TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › We need shorter bills!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

We need shorter bills!

post #1 of 32
8/18/09 at 4:57am
Thread Starter 
Congress needs to pass a law that limits the number of words/pages in legislation.

Personally I like O'Reilly's suggestion that no bill should be longer than 5 pages, and all points should be bullets.

The framers of our Constitution were able to craft a document that defined our government and provided the framework for our legal system, still relevant 200+ years later, and this document, when transcribed is a mere 8 typewritten pages and some 4400 words. Even adding all 27 amendments brings the total to about 7700 words and 18 pages.

By comparison, the proposed health reform bill is over 800 pages, some 100 times longer than our Constitution!

This is just absurd. No bill needs to be this long. If you can't read it and understand it in 30 minutes or less, it isn't worthy of being considered.
Reply
post #2 of 32
8/18/09 at 6:11am
Part of that is to close loopholes that the unscrupulous would use to circumvent the meaning of a bill. Doesn't seem to work too well though.
I really think that it is also in part to make the meaning so darn obscure that no one but a lawyer with a team of researchers can comprehend it, thus preventing anyone from complaining about what is about to be done to (oops I mean for) us in any given bill.

On the same note, companies are trying to cover their behinds regarding any possible product misuse and resulting lawsuits. There is now so much info on labels, in such small print to fit it all on, that I can't even see the instructions without peeling off the label and taping to the wall in order to get far enough away to see it! And that's with glasses on.
Reply
post #3 of 32
8/18/09 at 6:29am
I translate a fair number of business contracts, and very, very rarely see any as short as five pages, and would be extremely sceptical of any bill that brief, because it couldn't possibly cover most contingencies.

U.S. society is much more complex than it was in 1789, and one must keep in mind that the Supreme Court is still attempting to intrepret the intent of parts of the Consititution and the Bill of Rights.
Reply
post #4 of 32
8/18/09 at 6:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
U.S. society is much more complex than it was in 1789, and one must keep in mind that the Supreme Court is still attempting to intrepret the intent of parts of the Consititution and the Bill of Rights.
Right, that's it exactly. Lawyers and judges have spent millions of hours debating the meaning of the various words of the constitution. Just look at the debates we have over the meanings of the 1st and 2nd Amendments even today, over 200 years after the Bill of Rights was enacted. Think how much time (and lawyer fees) we could have saved if the founders had been a bit more wordy.

The other problem with writing short, bullet point laws is: who fills in the details? For something as complicated as health care, 5 pages of bullet points is going to be very, very vague and broad. Either somebody else is going to have to fill in the details or the courts will have to intervene every time there is a disagreement over one of the broad provisions.
Reply
post #5 of 32
8/18/09 at 6:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
I translate a fair number of business contracts, and very, very rarely see any as short as five pages, and would be extremely sceptical of any bill that brief, because it couldn't possibly cover most contingencies.

U.S. society is much more complex than it was in 1789, and one must keep in mind that the Supreme Court is still attempting to intrepret the intent of parts of the Consititution and the Bill of Rights.
Agreed.

Bill O'Reilly recently stated that life expectancy in Canada is higher than in the US because the latter has more people. I know a lot of people enjoy his show, and he may be entertaining, but I wouldn't take his advice on any legal matter, let alone this one.
Reply
post #6 of 32
8/18/09 at 7:02am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grogs View Post
Right, that's it exactly. Lawyers and judges have spent millions of hours debating the meaning of the various words of the constitution. Just look at the debates we have over the meanings of the 1st and 2nd Amendments even today, over 200 years after the Bill of Rights was enacted. Think how much time (and lawyer fees) we could have saved if the founders had been a bit more wordy.

The other problem with writing short, bullet point laws is: who fills in the details? For something as complicated as health care, 5 pages of bullet points is going to be very, very vague and broad. Either somebody else is going to have to fill in the details or the courts will have to intervene every time there is a disagreement over one of the broad provisions.
How can our representatives be expected to read a bill that is 1,000+ pages long, let alone understand it in all it's complexities?

I think part of the problem is that they are trying to pass to much stuff in one measure. Take the health reform bill, for example. Why not just start with one simple provision - allow all insurance companies to cross state lines and sell coverage throughout the US. As it is now, each state has certain companies that can only cover residents/companies within the state. That is stupid. A bill allowing open enrollment regardless of the state of residence could be written and passed in one measure that would only take a couple of pages.

The same problem with Bush's immigration bill. It covered way too much. Break it down into smaller digestible pieces, and it would be easier to get it passed, and us common folk might understand it.
Reply
post #7 of 32
8/18/09 at 6:46pm
I personally believe we need shorter Joes, not Bills!
Reply
post #8 of 32
8/18/09 at 6:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty's Mom View Post
How can our representatives be expected to read a bill that is 1,000+ pages long, let alone understand it in all it's complexities?

I think part of the problem is that they are trying to pass to much stuff in one measure. Take the health reform bill, for example. Why not just start with one simple provision - allow all insurance companies to cross state lines and sell coverage throughout the US. As it is now, each state has certain companies that can only cover residents/companies within the state. That is stupid. A bill allowing open enrollment regardless of the state of residence could be written and passed in one measure that would only take a couple of pages.

The same problem with Bush's immigration bill. It covered way too much. Break it down into smaller digestible pieces, and it would be easier to get it passed, and us common folk might understand it.
Congress is to stupid to make a bill that is easy to understand. They want it to be complicated so they can think they are intelligent.

I wish someone would ask that question about insurance companies being allowed to cross state lines. Not that any moronic member of Congress would answer it. I saw some clips tonight of the town hall meeting that Barney Franks had tonight, all he did was talk down to the citizens attending.
We are the stupid public, the unwashed masses, the idiots that pay Congress' salary, we mean nothing to them. They will brook no dissent, they want us to put up and shut up. The fact that we are speaking out, LOUDLY, is shocking to them, so they just insult us.

This is the United States of America in the year of our Lord, 2009
Reply
post #9 of 32
8/18/09 at 10:16pm
Certainly not exclusive to any Congressman talked about in this thread, but I do think that this graph (from GraphJam) is pretty accurate in most cases.

Reply
post #10 of 32
8/19/09 at 5:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Congress is to stupid to make a bill that is easy to understand. They want it to be complicated so they can think they are intelligent.

I wish someone would ask that question about insurance companies being allowed to cross state lines. Not that any moronic member of Congress would answer it. I saw some clips tonight of the town hall meeting that Barney Franks had tonight, all he did was talk down to the citizens attending.
We are the stupid public, the unwashed masses, the idiots that pay Congress' salary, we mean nothing to them. They will brook no dissent, they want us to put up and shut up. The fact that we are speaking out, LOUDLY, is shocking to them, so they just insult us.

This is the United States of America in the year of our Lord, 2009
The reason people are being talked down to is because they are screaming and acting like total idiots. If you act like an idiot, you will be treated like an idiot. I definitely think there should be dissenting views brought up for discussion, but they should be based on FACTS and not propaganda lies, and they should be asked with respect and then the answers should be listened to.

I think the Democrats have been way too overboard trying to appease the Republicans, when the Republicans have absolutely NO intention of voting for any bill no matter what it contains. I wish the Republicans would start bringing some constructive ideas to the table and forget trying to stir up the "base" with lies and distrotions of the truth, so we could really get a good bi-partisan bill that worksfor the majority of the people in this country.

If you don't want to be part of the solution, then shut up and sit down.
Reply
post #11 of 32
8/19/09 at 5:07am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty's Mom View Post
How can our representatives be expected to read a bill that is 1,000+ pages long, let alone understand it in all it's complexities?
Isn't that their job? If they can't read it and understand it, then why are they in that office?

I would wager the ones who aren't attoneys themselves have enough attorneys on staff to explain any legal aspects they themselves don't comprehend. Frankly, there is no excuse for any elected official to vote on something they haven't read or don't understand.
Reply
post #12 of 32
8/19/09 at 8:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misty8723 View Post
Isn't that their job? If they can't read it and understand it, then why are they in that office?

I would wager the ones who aren't attoneys themselves have enough attorneys on staff to explain any legal aspects they themselves don't comprehend. Frankly, there is no excuse for any elected official to vote on something they haven't read or don't understand.
You're 100% correct on that, but they sure spent over $700 Billion of our money without reading the bill. With all the amendments and such that were added, I don't think any of them read or knew what the Stimulus bill actually contained. Maybe Pelosi and Reid. Maybe.

As for bringing ideas to the table, the Republicans do have ideas. They haven't been asked, or if they have not one of their ideas has made it to any of the bills. Not one. There is ONE group of Senators attempting to work on a bipartisan bill. One group of four. As far as I know, that's the extent of any real attempt at bipartisanship.

In an interview between Greta Van Sustran (yes, on Fox - Greta was on CNN for many years, and she is pretty centrist I believe) and MN Gov. Tim Pawlenty, he brings a short list of things he thinks could be a bipartisan starting point: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,540163,00.html

Quote:
VAN SUSTEREN: All right, so two questions -- a two-part question. How do you do it? And why didn't you do it the last eight years, if it's such a serious problem?
PAWLENTY: Well, I think President Bush and others tried. But I think here's the list that I think Republicans and Democrats could come together on. I'll try not to go through it all, but certainly, we could do medical malpractice reform and get rid of junk lawsuits. We certainly should have more electronic prescriptions, electronic medical records. We certainly should allow people to buy insurance over state lines and pool risks over state lines, maybe even internationally with consumer protections. We need to start paying for performance on health care outcomes, rather than paying for volumes of procedures. And much more. But there's a lot of things we could do on a bipartisan basis that keep the consumers in charge, that would bring down costs.


Sounds reasonable to me, and these points are not new ideas. They have been brought up, and the only thing remotely similar to any of these in the currently available bill is the electronic records.
Reply
post #13 of 32
8/19/09 at 9:01am
The people at Barney's town hall meeting were not out of line, that I heard,
but he still talked down to them like they were idiots.

Oh yes, I know, it is only the Republicans that lie.
Reply
post #14 of 32
8/19/09 at 9:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by valanhb View Post
As for bringing ideas to the table, the Republicans do have ideas. They haven't been asked, or if they have not one of their ideas has made it to any of the bills. Not one.
What are their ideas? What have they tried to bring to the table that is being ignored? And please don't quote Fox News and I won't quote MSNBC. I'm not being smart or trying to start an argument, I really do want to know. Because all I've been hearing from the Republicans is death panels and other lies, nothing even remotely constructive.
Reply
post #15 of 32
8/19/09 at 9:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
The people at Barney's town hall meeting were not out of line, that I heard,
but he still talked down to them like they were idiots.:
I haven't seen video of Barney Frank's town hall meeting, so you could be right. The media is centering on the ones where the people are behaving like idiots.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Oh yes, I know, it is only the Republicans that lie.
No, but you have to admit, they're very effective at it.
Reply
post #16 of 32
8/19/09 at 10:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misty8723 View Post
What are their ideas? What have they tried to bring to the table that is being ignored? And please don't quote Fox News and I won't quote MSNBC. I'm not being smart or trying to start an argument, I really do want to know. Because all I've been hearing from the Republicans is death panels and other lies, nothing even remotely constructive.
http://www.gopleader.gov/UploadedFil...p__Outline.pdf
Reply
post #17 of 32
8/19/09 at 1:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misty8723 View Post
What are their ideas? What have they tried to bring to the table that is being ignored? And please don't quote Fox News and I won't quote MSNBC. I'm not being smart or trying to start an argument, I really do want to know. Because all I've been hearing from the Republicans is death panels and other lies, nothing even remotely constructive.
The Patients' Choice Act of 2009, introduced May 2009 by U.S. Senators Tom Coburn, (R-OK) and Richard Burr (R-NC) and U.S. Representatives Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Devin Nunes (R-CA). How much coverage in the media did this get?

Short (1 page) Summary by the authors on Real Clear Politics: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...are_96575.html

Summary: http://www.house.gov/ryan/PCA/PCAsummary15p.pdf

House GOP Proposal from June (article from CNN Money): http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/17/news...bill/index.htm

From Roy Blunt's (R-MO) website, who co-authored the proposal: http://blunt.house.gov/Read.aspx?ID=1171

Quote:
And please don't quote Fox News and I won't quote MSNBC.
Any particular reason why you won't believe news stories or direct quotes from a reputable news source? I try not to quote or link to opinion pieces, and if I do then I make it clear that those are not news stories, but editorials. I have no problem with MSNBC news stories; in fact I visit their site regularly. I would discount opinion pieces disguised as news from MSNBC, and I would accept that you would do the same for opinion pieces from Fox News.
Reply
post #18 of 32
8/19/09 at 1:34pm
Misty8723, you, like millions of others, think that the Republican Party is just trashing Obamacare without offering a plan of their own. Simply not true.
Just that the drive bye media won't put out anything if it comes from the GOP, not if it is good, anyway.
Reply
post #19 of 32
8/19/09 at 1:44pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Misty8723 View Post
Isn't that their job? If they can't read it and understand it, then why are they in that office?

I would wager the ones who aren't attoneys themselves have enough attorneys on staff to explain any legal aspects they themselves don't comprehend. Frankly, there is no excuse for any elected official to vote on something they haven't read or don't understand.
The stimulus bill was over 1,000 pages and they only had a few hours to read it. No one is that good! And if you questioned Obama, he didn't know either.

Two things the health bill needs above all else, and let's try this on for size for a year or two:
1. Open selling of insurance across state lines.
2. Pooling of smaller companies into coops to bargain for better rates like the large companies get.

Both are simple ideas. Let's see how that works before we totally screw up the rest of health care.
Reply
post #20 of 32
8/19/09 at 2:02pm
And since they are screaming that Social Security will be broke in two years, take the DARN CAP OFF.

They are all a bunch of idiots, both parties, ALL of them.
Reply
post #21 of 32
8/19/09 at 3:02pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
And since they are screaming that Social Security will be broke in two years, take the DARN CAP OFF.

They are all a bunch of idiots, both parties, ALL of them.
YES and YES!!!
Reply
post #22 of 32
8/20/09 at 6:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
The people at Barney's town hall meeting were not out of line, that I heard,
but he still talked down to them like they were idiots.

Oh yes, I know, it is only the Republicans that lie.
Oh yeah, bringing Hitler posters to speak with a Jew is not out of line. Maybe next time at an Obama town hall the protesters will dress up as minstrels!
Reply
post #23 of 32
8/20/09 at 6:53am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mom of Franz View Post
Oh yeah, bringing Hitler posters to speak with a Jew is not out of line. Maybe next time at an Obama town hall the protesters will dress up as minstrels!
Is that fact or merely your opinion?
Reply
post #24 of 32
8/20/09 at 5:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty's Mom View Post
Is that fact or merely your opinion?

Well it is a well known fact that Barney Frank is a Jew--he calls himself the only left-handed, gay Jew in the senate.

I would not be shocked as far as the minstrel thing, and that is my opinion, which I value. Given the shenanigans of the right, I almost expect it.

Have I explained that well enough for you?
Reply
post #25 of 32
8/20/09 at 6:13pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mom of Franz View Post
Well it is a well known fact that Barney Frank is a Jew--he calls himself the only left-handed, gay Jew in the senate.

I would not be shocked as far as the minstrel thing, and that is my opinion, which I value. Given the shenanigans of the right, I almost expect it.

Have I explained that well enough for you?
Nope.

Hitler posters?

Proof or link please!
Reply
post #26 of 32
8/20/09 at 6:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mom of Franz View Post
Well it is a well known fact that Barney Frank is a Jew--he calls himself the only left-handed, gay Jew in the senate.

I would not be shocked as far as the minstrel thing, and that is my opinion, which I value. Given the shenanigans of the right, I almost expect it.

Have I explained that well enough for you?

What about the, "shenanigan's" of the left, what with that Democrat lady with the Nazi sign?

What about ACORN and SEIU bussing people in to the Town Hall meetings and shoving the people that have legitimate concerns about the HC bill aside and not even letting them in the meeting in many instances.

And the media and the democratic politicians accuse the Right of bussing people in when it is the LEFT doing it. Pelosi and Reid and the rest calling Americans nasty names because they have the audacity to question Barack's HC bill. Now THAT is what I call "shenanigan's"

FTR, the signs, while I do not agree with them, it should be mentioned that they have a picture of Hitler with a line slashed through it.
Reply
post #27 of 32
8/20/09 at 6:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty's Mom View Post
Nope.

Hitler posters?

Proof or link please!
The youtube video was posted and referenced here on this site! The woman had an Obama as Hitler poster!

I believe it was posted by CKBLV. I apologize if I am wrong on the authoress!

Where is your apology?
Reply
post #28 of 32
8/20/09 at 7:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
What about the, "shenanigan's" of the left, what with that Democrat lady with the Nazi sign?

What about ACORN and SEIU bussing people in to the Town Hall meetings and shoving the people that have legitimate concerns about the HC bill aside and not even letting them in the meeting in many instances.

And the media and the democratic politicians accuse the Right of bussing people in when it is the LEFT doing it. Pelosi and Reid and the rest calling Americans nasty names because they have the audacity to question Barack's HC bill. Now THAT is what I call "shenanigan's"

FTR, the signs, while I do not agree with them, it should be mentioned that they have a picture of Hitler with a line slashed through it.
I do not care if that woman was a conservative dem or not, she does not share a bloodline with the civilized world.

The universal symbol of a line slash means "NO" so the sign, means- No Hitler-like policies- which is how THEY view health care reform. They see it as Hitlerish. Imagine Hitler concerned about human health! My kidneys just did a 360, laughing at that!
Reply
post #29 of 32
8/20/09 at 7:12pm
C'mon folks, let's stop the shenanigans going on here and all this personal digging at one another. Both sides have a lot to answer for over the years - it's 6 of one and a half dozen the other. Let's play nice or take the digs to PM's because other posters would likely be interested in getting in on the conversation portions of the posts.
Reply
post #30 of 32
8/20/09 at 7:38pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
C'mon folks, let's stop the shenanigans going on here and all this personal digging at one another. Both sides have a lot to answer for over the years - it's 6 of one and a half dozen the other. Let's play nice or take the digs to PM's because other posters would likely be interested in getting in on the conversation portions of the posts.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › We need shorter bills!